Le samedi 6 juin 2015, 00:13:59 Brian May a écrit : > On Sat, 6 Jun 2015 at 02:11 Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org> wrote: > > > Given that the packages in question appear to be Free Software (at least > > from a quick check of a couple of them, as well as the repository being > > named "main"), is there a reason you don't maintain them in Debian > > (including backports or volatile if you need to provide the newest > > packages for older distributions)? > > Well, this had been in Debian for some years until 2010 under an other name: 'beid' https://packages.qa.debian.org/b/beid.html but I don't know why it was removed. > In my case I maintain open source software Debian packages outside of > Debian because the software is far to volatile (e.g. important bug fixes on > a weekly basis) and I don't want old versions hanging around any longer > then absolutely required. Maybe Debian could just ship "eid-archive" package almost as-is, it's not like the key changes every day; the one active here doesn't even have an expiry date. This only contain: /usr/share/eid-archive/eid.list /usr/share/eid-archive/keys/10a04d46.gpg /usr/share/eid-archive/keys/6773d225.gpg - Belgian eID Automatic Signing Key (official releases) + a postinst & postrm The others packages would remain in http://files.eid.belgium.be/debian/ There is very little to clean-up: lintian /var/cache/apt-cacher-ng/files.eid.belgium.be/debian/pool/main/e/eid-archive/eid-archive_2014.8_all.deb W: eid-archive: copyright-without-copyright-notice W: eid-archive: command-with-path-in-maintainer-script postrm:7 /usr/bin/ucf > It is also a very narrow market, possibly not of > general interest to the Debian community (this is hard to determine > however; maybe what this needs right now is expanded exposure). Well 'beid' was there before and a there's a potential 10 millions persons having to do their taxes this month and needing this stuff if they are using Debian or a derivative. eid-archive is a tiny 'all' package that weights 6040 bytes :-) I guess the pros outweigh the cons. > There was also the (slightly confusing) perception in management that they > had to tightly control ownership and distribution, despite it being open > source GPL software, available on github, etc. Entirely possible :-( Alexandre Detiste
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.